Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62012TA0444

    Case T-444/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2014  — Novartis v OHIM — Tenimenti Angelini (LINEX) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark LINEX — Earlier national word mark LINES PERLA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 76(1), in fine, of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009)

    OJ C 421, 24.11.2014, p. 32–33 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    24.11.2014   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 421/32


    Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2014 — Novartis v OHIM — Tenimenti Angelini (LINEX)

    (Case T-444/12) (1)

    ((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark LINEX - Earlier national word mark LINES PERLA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 76(1), in fine, of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

    2014/C 421/44

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Novartis AG (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)

    Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, acting as Agent)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Tenimenti Angelini SpA (Montalcino, Italy) (represented by: R. Almaraz Palmero, lawyer)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 August 2012 (Case R 414/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Tenimenti Angelini SpA and Novartis AG.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1)

    Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for the Harmonisation of the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 August 2012 (Case R 414/2011-4);

    2)

    Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the applicant;

    3)

    Orders the intervener to bear its own costs.


    (1)  OJ C 399, 22.12.2012.


    Top